ArticleActa medica Philippina2025
Safety and Efficacy of the AMPA Receptor Antagonist Perampanel for Tremors: A Systematic Review.
Article in Acta medica Philippina, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Perampanel is an antagonist of the α-amino-3-hydroxy-5-methyl-4-isoxazolepropionic acid (AMPA) receptor. It is currently FDA-approved to treat focal and generalized tonic-clonic seizures in epilepsy, but recent evidence suggests its potential in treating severe and refractory tremors. Objectives: To determine the safety and efficacy of perampanel in treating tremors via a systematic review of existing literature. Methods: We performed a literature search on five large databases (PubMed, Cochrane, Google Scholar, HERDIN, and Scopus) for clinical studies within the last 10 years and screened a total of 1,539 unique articles for full assessment. We filtered out papers on epilepsy as well as hypokinetic diseases and assessed nine articles for quality assessment and review. Results: A total of four case reports/series, four open-label trials, and one randomized controlled trial were assessed to be of fair to good quality. All trials showed that low-dose perampanel (2-4 mg/day) was safe and well-tolerated with minor adverse events reported by participants. A net benefit from baseline was observed in patients with essential and primary orthostatic tremors. However, current evidence is weak because the trials employed a non-randomized before-after study design with a small sample size and significant dropout rates. Conclusion: Low-dose perampanel at 2-4 mg/day shows promising potential in treating refractory tremors and myoclonus in recent clinical studies, but current evidence is weak or anecdotal. Additional randomized controlled trials are needed to determine the conclusive benefit of perampanel for hyperkinesia.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.